Since impeachment is a political process, it is highly unlikely 67 Senators would or should vote to impeach a president unless a majority of the American people agreed.  And if politically impeachment isn't warranted and Congress is unwilling or unable to change the Independent Counsel law and repeal the new rule of evidence in sexual harassment cases, the only legal and logical, and moral choice is to personally censure Clinton -- and, as his own lawyers have suggested, have him face prosecution for perjury after he leaves office as every other American would in the forum designed to determine such questions:  a court of law.
    Indeed a major issue behind the headlines has been whether to let the criminal justice system run its normal course and prosecute Clinton for perjury after he leaves office on January 20, 2001.  And this is a major reason the Republicans have insisted Clinton admit to lying under oath and why Clinton continues to insist that he didn't lie under oath because he didn't think he was lying. The stakes are high --  not just to broker a deal on censure -- but also because while it is entirely possible Clinton would be found not guilty, especially by a jury in the District of Columbia, a guilty verdict could result in the loss of his pension and funds for a presidential library, as well as disbarment from the legal profession.

Clearly Clinton still doesn't get it.  He has apologized for making a mistake and a critical lapse in judgment when we now know he made at least 80 mistakes and critical lapses of judgment with Monica alone.  And the mistakes weren't just repeated sexual contacts with a 21 year old intern, but numerous private meetings, 50 telephone calls, and many exchanges of gifts and confidences.  Perhaps most  revealing was his rebuke to a cabinet member who had the temerity to chastise him that her type of thinking "would have given the country Nixon rather than Kennedy."  This not only shows a breathtaking self-denial about how the rules of press coverage have dramatically changed over the last 35 years, but also that he believes seeking sexual favors from subordinates is a prerogative of his position, and he expects his staff, friends, and family to accept, cover, and enable these activities as they had in the past.

    So why then are the American people not more outraged?  And why have so many intelligent people continued to support Clinton, often with tortured logic like Gloria Steinum's ludicrous, and unsustainable rationale that a political leader can drop his pants and grope and make the grossest sexual advances to subordinates as long as he takes his hands away and pulls up his pants when "she says no."  Because the Republicans don't get it either.  They seem oblivious that the saturation of public culture with sex has changed private morals, and adultery and different kinds of sex do not carry the taboos of an earlier age.  And releasing the x-rated details as widely as possible rather than as discretely as possible, and at the first opportunity rather than as a last resort, clearly showed they were less interested in what was best for our country or our institutions than what they perceived was best for their political party.
    But the main reason for this mess is the Republicans seem clueless that their rigid position on guns and abortion are so far out of step with most Americans, and thus the American people are not so much enamored of Clinton as afraid to turn the country over to the religious right and the NRA.  Simply put, morality cannot be legislated just as surely as high office doesn't automatically confer values or character or integrity.
    Clearly many Republicans are after Clinton because they consider him to be  "immoral," and clearly many believe the Impeachment charges "make up" for misconduct in other areas that can't be proven.  (FBI files on prominent Republicans that are "accidentally" sent to the White House, Rose law firm files that "magically materialize" in the residence area of the White House, video tapes of fundraisers that "magically de-materialize," and 90 witnesses who have fled the country or taken the 5th shows something is wrong.)  But also clearly, despite the public rhetoric, the process would not have gotten this far if moderate Republicans and many Democrats were not disgusted with Clinton's actions as well.

Clinton supporters argue that impeachment is only proper when there are high crimes and misdemeanors "against the state."  But our founding fathers knew what they didn't know, the future, and thus left the standard ambiguous because at some point a president's private actions could render him incapable of governing, and impeachment would be the only alternative for a president who was unable to separate what was best for the country from what was best for himself.  For example, while consensual extramarital sex between consenting adults lacks the social stigma and political penalty it had in the past, at some point sex still matters.  What if Monica had been 20 instead of 21 years old?  Or 18, or 16, or 14, or 12?  Or had been Mark instead of Monica?
    Indeed the real question is whether Clinton can effectively govern over the next 24 months.  We are told he has a tremendous ability to "compartmentalize,"  meaning he can  keep his private faults separate from his public virtues -- or that he can be in denial about his private failings while being rational about his public strengths.  But can we be sure his exceptionally poor judgment and breath-taking stupidity will be limited to his private life.  And how can we be sure his convincing and emphatic lies will be limited to his private affairs... particularly if he doesn't even know when he is lying.

Connecting the dots leads to three inescapable conclusions: (1) assuming the Senate will not impeach, any censure must include facing a court for lying under oath like any other American after he leaves office; (2) if the president loses enough public support so that he cannot effectively and fully exercise the political and moral powers of his office, the elders in his party should insist he resign; and (3) there is but one logical and honorable way out of this mess for the American people:  we must insist on Revolutionary Election Campaign  Reform -- not just outlawing "soft money" and foreign money, and other financing reforms, but changing the way candidates are chosen and campaigns are conducted.
Think about it:  Monica didn't get her formerly prestigious job as a White House Intern because of her academic record or work credentials, but because her family knew a major contributor to the Democratic party. Think about it:  in the not too distant past accepting campaign funds from the Red Chinese Army would not have been just a possible campaign financing violation, but treason.  Think about it:  in the last few weeks the Election Commission and a lower federal court have gutted the modest campaign reforms enacted in the 1970's by allowing unlimited soft-money contributions from any individual, company, or organization, whether American or foreign. Think about it: we have been told spending over $500 million on a presidential election is justified because the process and press can "vet" the candidates and we will end up with only the brightest and the best.  (As Monica would say: "Hello!")   Just Think about it:  Congress' only consistent and effective bipartisan efforts have been to defeat campaign election reform.

    The ultimate irony is that while Clinton gained and retained the presidency by basing his every move and gesture on daily polls, he largely destroyed his presidency by (1) deciding to lie under oath a second time because a poll showed his popularity rating would go down if he admitted he lied under oath the first time; and (2) because he was unable to believe the Republicans would ignore the polls and press for impeachment after the election.
    The bottom line is the Republicans would be far wiser to cease their complicity in demeaning our institutions and let history bestow its harsh judgment.  Because surely ten years from now the sex scandals will be but a footnote to to the real tragedy of the Clinton Presidency:  his failure to use the office to address the real problems including special interest and foreign influence on our elections; the bankruptcy of social security and Medicare; and a failed foreign policy that allowed countries to develop nuclear and chemical capabilities for terror and blackmail.

The present distraction over censure and impeachment is but another sign that our campaign election system is broken and needs to be fixed.  This is  our generation's most important challenge... because while the present problems are daunting, the future possibilities are limitless.